so here we are again. another slutwalk, another sex-positive man organizing it, standing behind women (but not in a creepy way!) and supporting womens god-given right to be sexually penetrated by men. now thats good faux-feminism! and it gets even better than that: this particular dood as recently as earlier today went by the internet handle “molester” on internet forum “formspring”. you know, because sexual assault is funny, and stuff and things. alas, the women who allowed this dood to “help” them pull off slutwalk baltimore probably shouldve done a background check; or at the very least, followed the links he left on his facebook profile, where they wouldve learned about the “molester” thing. oh well! im not blaming the women, really; thats just what happens when you do feminist organizing with men. you have to be super-extra vigilant, and they werent.

what we have here is (apparently) an 18-year old male anarchist who credits himself with “kickstarting” baltimore slutwalk, but who doesnt know the first fucking thing about feminism: his blogger profile doesnt even indicate “feminism” as an interest. at least he doesnt lie about it i guess? except when hes lying by omission of course. because one of the first things he did when an actual woman-identified feminist confronted him regarding his disgusting behavior as “molester” on another site was to delete the account and all traces of his previous persona, a high school student who left vile, woman-hating commentary about the internet which was available as of today. that he claims he was a high-school student at the time (and hes practically still one now) doesnt change anything, although i’d like to think this little bastard could still learn something about feminism and his own male privilege, before turning into hugo schwyzer. of course, he probably wont learn anything, and i know its not even possible for a man to appreciate his own male privilege and stop abusing it. but i am choosing to see this as a “teachable moment” regardless.

and dont even get me started on the idea of an anarchist — someone who resents any formal social controls on him at all — getting involved in a movement thats supposedly about rape (a legal construct) and protecting the interests of girls and women from men who would sexually violate them. according to his blogger profile, dood fashions himself and his politics after (among others) “tucker”. although he doesnt say, this sounds like a reference to benjamin tucker, the anarchist-dood that apparently wrote this charming passage entitled “anarchy and rape” in the 1800s (but sounds like any modern pedophile or MRA, or fake-feminist-anarchist, take your pick):

With a plentiful sprinkling of full-face Gothic exclamation points and a series of hysterical shrieks, the Journal of United Labor, organ of pious Powderly and pure Litchman, rushes upon Liberty with the inquiry whether Anarchy asks liberty to ruin little girls. Liberty is thus questioned simply because it characterized those who petitioned the Massachusetts legislature for a further raise of the age of consent to sixteen as a bevy of impertinent and prudish women. The answer shall be direct and explicit. Anarchy does not ask liberty to ruin little girls, but it does ask liberty of sexual association with girls already several years past the age of womanhood, equipped by nature with the capacity of maternity, and even acknowledged by the law to be competent to marry and begin the rearing of a family. To hold a man whose association with such a girl has been sanctioned by her free consent and even her ardent desire guilty of the crime of rape and to subject him to life imprisonment is an outrage to which a whole font of exclamation points would do scant justice. If there are any mothers, as the Journal of United Labor pretends, who look upon such an outrage as a protection against outrage, they confess thereby not only their callous disregard of human rights, but the imbecility of their daughters and their own responsibility for the training that has allowed them to grow up in imbecility. Has Liberty a daughter? further inquires the Journal of United Labor. Why, certainly; Order is Liberty’s daughter, acknowledged as such from the first. Liberty is not the daughter, but the mother, of Order. But it is needless to raise the age of consent on account of Liberty’s daughter. Order fears no seducer. When all daughters have such mothers and all mothers such daughters, the Journal of United Labor may continue to regard them as the worst of womankind, but the powers of the seducer will be gone, no matter what may be fixed as the age of consent. Because Liberty holds this opinion and expresses it, Powderly and Litchman profess to consider her a disgrace to the press of America. Really they do not so look upon her, but they are very anxious to win popular approval by pandering to popular prejudices, and so they took advantage of the opportunity which Liberty’s words gave them to pose as champions of outraged virtue while endeavoring to identify Anarchism with wholesale rape of the innocents.

okay? this is what we are dealing with here. sexually predatory men who, regardless of whatever else they may or may not want, historically, do not want a bunch of prudish women telling them they cant fuck 13-year old girls. and anarchism is informing the sexual politics of at least one of the organizers of baltimore slutwalk.

now, heres how this all went down. it started on facebook, with an image of some of “molester”‘s previous handiwork, and a call to the rest of the community and to baltimore slutwalk: is this who you want representing you? really? to his credit, he doesnt deny it, although he does engage in some olympic-grade backpedaling and worming-squirming:

SlutWalk Baltimore This was two years ago. I fully admit on video that I used to be a part of the problem. I’ll leave this on here just to live up to the fact. I make no excuses for some of the truly disgusting things I’ve said, and I apologize, now and always.

SlutWalk Baltimore Let me also note I was about sixteen at the time of this posting. I don’t even remember writing this or know where it is posted. Not an excuse, but it is a caveat.

yes, i was young then, see? unlike now. im 18! ima big-boy now! (and yes, in the beginning he was still responding from his “slutwalk baltimore” account.) in short order we are told that the name “molester” was given to him in school, and he never objected to it: he just rolled with it (the implication being that we should just roll with rape-culture too? i guess? thats rich!):

SlutWalk Baltimore Again, the Formspring is a couple of years old. I forgot it was even there– people used to call me that in school, so I rolled with it. I forgot all about it.

yes like all male-privileged persons, he used and abused his male privilege to unabashedly identify with the rapist-class, and didnt challenge rape culture at all, even as recently as today, right before he deleted his “molester” account: why bother challenging the part of rape culture he likes? you know, the part where he gets to bond with other men over the sexualized abuse and humiliation of girls and women, by men?

then, he further abuses his male privilege by deleting his “molester” account: abusing his privilege, as a male-bodied person to re-write history, including erasing it when its convenient to do so, instead of letting the community judge him based on the facts and what he has actually done. if that isnt the most egregious abuse of male power imaginable, i dont know what is. men write history, and they re-write it to suit themselves. men always do this, and this erasure of history has particular significance when considering the history of radical feminism, and womens resistance to being sexually used and abused by men. erasure is the preferred tactic of the patriarchy and of sex-positivism in particular, against radical feminists in particular, who protest mens molestation of girls and women in particular. male privilege fail!!!

i mean honestly, i could go on and on. clearly, this dood relishes his own male power — including rape culture — in many ways. interestingly, the point at which he does object seems to be precisely the point where girls and women become less sexually available to him and all men, and when other men start implying that girls and women shouldnt dress like sluts and whores for his pleasure, and that women should only be the property of one man, and not all men. that is the tipping point here, is it not? unacceptable! conservative! marching! against! like all liberal dickwads and self-identified feminist men supporting slutwalk, they are protesting the challenge to their entitlement that occurs in the friction and overlap, where liberal mens brand of rape-culture butts-up against conservative mens brand of rape-culture — marriage. its all rape culture though. thats the thing. liberalism and conservatism are both built on it.

and with that, i present this little asshole’s facebook profile, as it appeared earlier today (i have no idea if hes changed it, and i have no reason to check). of particular interest to me are his favorite books (commentary mine):

now, it just so happens that i was reading sheila jeffreys this very morning, and i literally just read her takedown of “lolita” about 2 hours before seeing this. 2 hours before. and i said i wanted to use this as a teachable moment, and i do. for anyone who is unfamiliar with her work, i cannot recommend sheila jeffreys strongly enough: anyone, and i mean anyone interested in sexual politics and “sex-positivism” should immediately read “the spinster and her enemies” and “anti-climax” should follow. this is game-changing, radical work, and gives historical context to sexual politics like nothing else i have seen. of course anyone teaching womens studies to women without having read (or understood) the classics by second-wave authors should be immediately dismissed. but i digress.

in the case of certain works of “great literature” that were initially challenged under obscenity rules, written by men to include all manners of sexual abuse of girls and women at the hands of men, including necrophilia, pedophilia, rape (and moar!) in “anti-climax” jeffreys reveals these works-of-art for what they really are: absolutely gagworthy pornographic degradation of women, that paved the way for a thriving global pornography industry that sexually degrades women too. and those previously-banned obscene books and their progeny — mainstream porn — were literally the propaganda for and the plot of the so-called sexual revolution of the 1960s and 70s. legitimizing and eroticising the sexual degradation of women — including rape and child-rape — informed and fueled the so-called “sexual” revolution. on which the current sex-positive platform was built. on which “slutwalk” itself is in fact built. but from whose perspective is any of this “sex”? this is not a rhetorical question.

and it really must be addressed, especially when sex-positive pro-porn anarchist male lolita-fanboys are organizing around issues of sexual politics, claiming to support the rights of women and girls to be free from the sexual abuse of men. its just not true.

anyway, without further ado, here is sheila jeffreys on “lolita” (anti-climax pages 76-85):

lolita! omg. have we had enough of this sex-positive male-centric bullshit yet? have we had enough of men injecting their sickening sadism and woman-hating cultural baggage — and practice — into “feminist” politics? have we? jesus fucking christ on a popsicle stick. come on people. if you want to do slutwalk, then fucking do it. without men. you do not have the time or energy to spend vetting this kind of shit beforehand, and you will always, always have to, when you are dealing with men — this is who they are. they are showing and telling you who they are. this is as good as it gets.

Regarding Lolita, Sheila Jeffrey’s analysis is spot on. I’ve never read anti-climax but I’m going to have to now!

I remember having a huge discussion on a mainstream website about that book. You should have seen the lengths the other “feminists” were going to to justify Nabokov. I was sneered at for my lack of intellectual sophistication as I dared to question the motives of the “artist”. I said it was obvious he had written it for his own, and other men’s, titillation.

I was told I had missed the point. That it was a double-think and we were supposed to condemn the narrator, Humbert. But we weren’t, were we? We were supposed to *identiy* and *sympathize* with him.

At least in Crime and Punishment, where Dostoyevski convinces us to empathize with a *murderer*, there is strict condemnation of the crime, and that novel really is a work of art.

Nabokov’s novel is nothing compared to Dostoyevski’s. So why the fame and fuss, I ask myself? There is only one answer: it’s porn.

What I’m saying is, the lengths women will go to to convince themselves that men are filled with integrity astound me. Male reporters, critics, journalists and slut steerers are a bunch of pervs, at least the ones who praise Lolita definitely are.

yes, her takedown of “naked lunch” right before “lolita” sheds some light on that one as well: oh but youve missed the point! the book was against cruelty! unfortunately, the author of naked lunch apparently kept guns and weapons in the bedroom and killed his wife. and if he was writing for “therapeutic” purposes, to exorcise his own demons, why did he have to publish it? and why did he write the same shit for 30 years? doesnt seem very therapeutic! LOL she sets them up and knocks them down. i wish i could scan the whole book.

it also doesnt address the issue of “therapy” and double-think (its cruel as a strategy against cruelty) when one considers that modern porn followed and is very cruel and to actual women. there were no actual women in these books that were so cruel, now its played on the bodies of real women. these books “winning” the legal battles created more cruelty because it legitimized it, ($$) it hasnt BEEN SHOWN to have exorcised anyones demons either. and as in lolita, men continue to blame the child, and they get erections thinking about that. is that a good way to stop it? its a very simple question, but is it? it hasnt worked yet. clearly, this is what they want, or they wouldnt keep doing it.

and for purposes of this post, the question would be, how is that appropriate “favorite reading” for a male slutwalk organizer, how might it and others like it (and the culture surrounding it) inform his sexual politics, and is it or is it not representative of rape culture that he claims to detest? and how does he reconcile the fact that he LOVES reading about a man raping a 12-year old girl? its his favorite.

“Why are they complete and utter Dickheads always…because rad-fems he./hey come from a great long line of HIS-torical DICKHEADS…and it is passed from one generation of cancerous uck-wit males to another. The glorification of the vile and violent abuse of womon has long been their aim from the get-go……and they care not how they infilitrate womens inner world, by an means necessary, it is all fair game to them…age matters not, consent matters not, human rights matters not, damage matters not, as long as they do what ‘they’ want.

Is there anything that the male class make which is not pornography? I mean, when you look at architecture, art, literature, cinema, music, painting, economics, war – all you see is phalluses, rape, pornographised women, male sadism and female masochism.

yes, thanks for the update! i wonder how many men and male-identifying women it took to convince him that what he did wasnt that bad. and not at all antithetical to the entire premise of slutwalk, and that includes him erasing the proof of what hes done. this *is* what rapists do, this *is* what pedophiles do. they erase the evidence of their misdeeds, they refuse to be accountable on the victims terms or womens terms especially, they put the burden of “credibility” and proof on everyone but themselves. this is what this is about: removing the proof and making credibility an issue. we all know who are default-credible under the P now dont we? and who isnt? luckily, i have screenshots. everyone should probably start screenshotting everything from now on.

Nice catch, FCM. What a bunch of assholes men are, anarchists or otherwise. That’s what happens when womyn include them in their so-called feminist movements: Men keep using porn and defending their ‘rights’ to fuck the womyn they call “slut.” I wish those ‘funfems’ would wake up and see the pieces of shit those men are.
Sheila Jeffreys is awesome. Thanks for the scan. 🙂
I am so tired of seeing some sort of ‘watered down’ shit that passes as feminism anywhere I go. The Academia is filled with pomo fem arguments like “there is no universal truth regarding sexism” and blah-the-fucking-blah, other bullshit.
Slutwalk, when I first saw that I thought “WTF?” Womyn cannot be more colonised, more oppressed as a sex class, when they walk the streets claiming to have heteronormative PIV ‘rights’ under the pretence of “re-claiming” a misogynistic slur which has been thrown at them for so many years. The “sexayyy” clothes the young womyn want to wear aren’t even theirs. Those are male-created and pornified outfits of so-called “empowerment.” You cannot re-claim something which wasn’t even yours to begin with. Too bad that this whole joke is on womyn, and men know it (though they obviously aren’t gonna tell them –they are still gonna keep playing the ‘nice guy’ game when womyn are around).

men write history, and they re-write it to suit themselves. men always do this, and this erasure of history has particular significance when considering the history of radical feminism, and womens resistance to being sexually used and abused by men. erasure is the preferred tactic of the patriarchy and of sex-positivism in particular, against radical feminists in particular, who protest mens molestation of girls and women in particular.

I don’t think they will ever manage to erase us. There will always be some womyn who know what is happening.
Female-born, female-bodied experience is unique to all womyn. It has not always been vilified and pornified (e.g. ancient matriarchal cultures).
Men are cruel, and until most womyn do not realise this and thus they cannot call all those male fuckers out on their misogynistic dudely behaviours, womyn aren’t going to get anywhere towards the liberation of our sex class. Damn it… 😦 It all keeps getting worse and worse…
Womyn, please, try to find out more about the Womyn’s liberation movement and radical feminism. Stop capitulating to this “third wave” patriarchal bullshit that’s supposed to pass as feminism! It doesn’t want your rights; it wants men’s “rights” to sexually use you as they please. Be stronger than that, womyn! Overcome heteropatriarchy and all its fucked-up passive ‘feminine’ roles and norms.

thanks maggie, well said. i agree that we wont be erased entirely, jeffreys books are still out there for example, you only need to know where to look. it helps to know or sense that you are missing something, too, which is the tricky part. combined with the erasing and attempted erasing/obfuscating/complicating, the overwhelming forces of normalization serve to make women doubt they are missing anything. even though they can feel it pretty fucking clearly. the harm-reduction strategies western women are privy to (birth control for example) serve as a balm somewhat. but they are the only ones who have the luxury of buffering the female-specific harms of the penis. they are the only ones for whom PIV-positivism wouldnt just kill them directly and obviously.

i do hope some of them come around. as noan said on the FB thread there WILL be women who have an a-ha moment at times like these, and *we* will be there to support them when they do.

western women are privy to (birth control for example) serve as a balm somewhat. but they are the only ones who have the luxury of buffering the female-specific harms of the penis. they are the only ones for whom PIV-positivism wouldnt just kill them directly and obviously.

I agree that, in the West, womyn have more of an illusory sense of ‘equality,’ and they too often forget about the egregious oppression and very unprivileged position s of non-Western womyn and third-world womyn.

Whatever “privileges” Western womyn get is through being properties of Western men of course, whether in marriage, hetero relationships, motherhood, prostitution, pornstitution and/or contribution to society (via working in the economy of Western Male Capitalism). Still, sex pozzie womyn keep claiming they’ve got the right to “choose” as they please. Well, NOT. Maybe your culture contains a tad less overt male coercion than, for instance, in the Third World, but that does not change the fact that the manipulation coming from malestream media and the indoctrination coming from patriarchal customs & institutions are all some other forms of coercion as well.

You often mention the female-specific harms of the penis via PIV, FCM. And I agree with you all the way. What I’m wondering though is… Have you ever considered extending your analysis of PIV to hetero PIA and PIM? (if you know what I mean) That would be interesting to talk about those things too, especially considering the ubiquity of pornography in the West and elsewhere. I don’t think it’s okay for a man to stick his dick *anywhere* into a womyn, and I’m sure you don’t either. The female-specific harms of the penis are pretty much just as awful in hetero PIA and PIM. Think of what Gail Dines said on the womyn who are being used and discarded by the pornography industry on a daily basis:

She talks about atrocious bodily harms there, and those harms are not just done by PIV, but also by PIA, PIM and ejaculating on a young girl’s face too. 😦 What do you think? Shouldn’t we extend our analysis of PIV to make sure it covers everything?

Yes, the erasure of what they do, the re-writing of history, is MORE disturbing almost, than what they do in the first place.
Males have zero accountability, and zero integrity. They don’T even know the meaning of those words.

of course i agree that there are many degrading and sexually degrading things that men do to women. PIV is unique however, because everything else can be done by men to other men: its dom/sub rather than anything designed to harm women *as women*. i have said before that if we were to get rid of the PIV-as-sex paradigm entirely, this would benefit all women as a sexual class around the world, probably more than any other reform. if we were to replace it with another penetrative sex act (or BDSM) i would be tempted to support that change. so long as it was the males that are the subs and the ones being penetrated, obviously. 🙂 imagine how sex would be different if that were the case? they express their collective resistance and rage at the very thought. it would completely remove the sexxxay, if PIV were eradicated, and then if submissive female sexuality were done away with too there would be nothing left that would be recognizable to most people. this says it all.

seriously, this last year of being PIV-critical has been so eye-opening. teh menz hate this one the most. its crazy talk!

FCM- Okay, I see. I agree with your focus PIV here. It was Dworkin’s focus in her revolutionary book Intercourse.

I simply think that it shouldn’t stop you (or us) from occasionally criticise the other horrible acts men do to womyn, so long as you/we say the terms ‘hetero’ or ‘male-on-female’ before mentioning the particular patriarchal act described. That way, you (or we) wouldn’t lose our focus on male harms to the female.

The reason why I’m concerned with this is, considering the increasing violence and degradation in pornographic materials, men nowadays no longer try to get ‘only PIV’ from their wives, prostitutes and/or girlfriends. Now they want everything else that’s invading and colonising as well. It’s a gruesome reality of increased colonisation. This increased colonisation does not occur when a man does it to another man, because that’s not a member of the oppressed class. Anything done to the oppressed is colonisation and pornographic sexuality is about males increasing their colonisation of females IMO.

So, you know what I mean: I think the PIV focus is spot on, but we shouldn’t forget about the other degrading things and we can also criticise them too from time to time.

And its a good point about colonization, although men do colonize other men too. But when you think of it in those terms you can easily imagine a scenario where a man penetrating another man wouldn’t be in a context of colonization, where when a man penetrates a woman, its always within that context.

Both Brenner and Nabokov exemplify why men and feminism can never mix……asking men to ‘join’ the ‘freedom bus’ was, is and ever will be a real ‘bad idea’, for womon…..and the de bruvverhood doth love to fool us into thinking that they are sympathetic to our concerns . Fun-fems , sadly like most womon at one time or another will also learn that men are never actually as a class sympathetic to anything other than their own perpetual ability to own us in anyway they can.

Regime Change is about ditching all that is male and re-spinning and re-asserting womons experience and power so that as a class and a community we ‘have’ dominion over all things…..

Like public burnings of all that as feminists we deem to be porn all literature that is deemed harfmul and degrading towards womon…massive bonfires and dragging down all websites that are remotely antiwomon

Nothing democratic about the world according to womon should be tolerated as far as males are concerned……a new world order where womon are holding the power is not for the fainthearted, that is why it will take eons of evolution before womon on mass can achieve real power……

The one act of ‘refusing’ PIV globally, would of course speed up matters……

@MaggieThe reason why I’m concerned with this is, considering the increasing violence and degradation in pornographic materials, men nowadays no longer try to get ‘only PIV’ from their wives, prostitutes and/or girlfriends

I think you have a good point here. I’m sure there are many women who are relieved when they are “only” under pressure to supply piv, rather than anal, deepthroating, fisting and/or a host of other porn-derived activities. PIV may come out as feeling like the LEAST degrading act (which is interesting, isnt it? How convenient for men!)

on the other hand, I remember FCM had a post a long time ago about how all other sexual practices are basically measured against PIV. PIV sets the standard and even if two people don’t actually have PIV and do other things, these things are based on a kind of PIV template. (I know. terrible paraphrasing here – sorry FCM!) So I tend to agree with your last point. I think if PIV is dealt with, it will mitigate the ways men try and force other degrading sexual acts on women. Cause all roads lead back to piv, in a sense. And once women are in the position where we no longer have to supply piv, nor would we have to supply other degrading sex acts, cause piv is the root of it all.

Though actualy I do see why there is a need to address other porn derived sex acts specifically. Back when I was 14 there was no pressure to supply anal, but that’s not the case for girls today. Many of these porn acts can be very physically damaging, and young girls are being bullied into doing them. It almost feels like a feminist emergency to address the mainstreaming of pornsex.

I have read a quote from “Lolita” in German when the sick fuck is getting an erection from having the girl move around when she is sitting on his lap. I suspects that this is what the images at the beginning of the commercial could be about. + The kissing at the end seems to be sick. I raised my little sister but I was NEVER in such a situation.

ironically, theres nothing stopping an anarchist — who resents formal (including legal) social controls on men, including sexual controls — from invoking legal-esque concepts such as “cyberbullying” when he feels threatened. and yes, whomever is posting from the slutwalk baltimore account does appear to be characterizing brennan lester as a “victim” here, in the context of having his own misogyny and support for rape-culture and abuses of his own male power revealed in the context of his organizing against sexual violence. amazing!

slutwalk baltimore account does appear to be characterizing brennan lester as a “victim” here, in the context of having his own misogyny and support for rape-culture and abuses of his own male power revealed in the context of his organizing against sexual violence.

Oh… Whadabout teh poor, poor menz? This one just wanted the truth to be kept secret from some of hiz female ‘friends’ from Sl*twalk. He haz some great manzly plans to fuck them sometime, yaknow? So please… shhh!!! Don’t talk about hiz involvement in rape culture. Thatz not good PR for the popular Ladiez’ boy…

thanks maggie. its indeed a fact that there are far more women watching all of this unfold than have commented either way. we will be here to suppose those who have an a-ha moment, now or in the future. it does happen.

its indeed a fact that there are far more women watching all of this unfold than have commented either way. we will be here to suppose those who have an a-ha moment, now or in the future. it does happen.

I hope women don’t mind if I get rid of many demons – but “Lolita” was a huge part of my life and still is a massive part of my trauma.
I know that book – amongst all the male violence and hate I knew was a massive reason I fight so hard to rid the world of porn, or at least show the damage that porn does. I have fought since I can remember against “artistic and classy” porn – not from reading feminist books or going to meetings, but from the gut of someone who was deeply oppressed by books like “Lolita”.

When I was a small child, “Lolita” was read to me by my stepdad, this was alongside showing me the Chester the Molester cartoons, and reading extracts of de Sade. I did not understand “Lolita”, but I knew it was a threat.
When my stepdad seriously begun to abuse for the long, from aged 12 to 19 – he talk about it as art, as love, as my sexual liberation and freedom, as sexual education – all the bullshit that books like “Lolita” promotes.

When I was prostituted, especially when it was framed as porn – “Lolita” was often the background noise.
I have been sexually tortured by punters after or during a showing of a film of “Lolita”. I have had punters speak to me as if I was a child, or made me call them Daddy.
I have punters give the book as a present, or read it to me before torturing me. One punter would test me on how well I knew “Lolita” – until I lost it and burnt the book – which for me as a publisher’s daughter was very difficult.

To be a prostitute, especially in escorting and “girlfriend” experience – it is often important to be the role of Lolita to somehow lessen, not stop, the violence. Lolita is mostly silent, she obey the rapist, she makes out she is happy, and she knows to be safe by boasting his ego – Lolita is the perfect indoors prostitute.

Ahaha, GREAT if extremely disheartening convo. It angers me so much that he thinks it’s excusable merely because he was 16. So. Fucking. What. I’M sixteen. But when you’re female, you have to grow up faster, because you KNOW you will be held accountable, you KNOW you will be blamed. If I were to get raped this year, I’m sure I’d be told there’s something I could have done to avoid it — but some boy goes around funnying it up about being a Molester at 16 — nope, that’s all fun and games. ‘Cause rape is FUNNY stuff. *anger* I think there is some hope for my generation, as far as feminism goes. I live within it, so I think I know. Don’t worry. 🙂

that is so true josie. females are held to a much higher standard of behaviour than men. Women are far more likely to be given a custodial sentence for a first offence than men. When women step out of line at all, patriarchy comes down on us like a ton of bricks. So we learn to keep ourselves as invisible and trouble-free as possible. Men do not have to learn the lessons we do. So when they fuck up they think they can laugh it off.

i agree that men think they can laugh everything off and that nothing they do could possibly be serious (unless they too-obviously interfere with another man or his property) BUT i also must point out that what this man did was NOT “in the past” as he and his supporters continue to insist. he had that molester account up until the DAY he was exposed for having it on FB: that was what, 4 days ago now? and not only that, he erased the evidence. he erased the evidence and covered-up his backslapping identification with the rapist class when it was discovered and revealed, to put the onus on *us* to prove that he had done it, KNOWING that women have a credibility issue around this issue specifically. and he did this as recently as 4 days ago. this *is* rape culture, through and through. this *is* how men abuse their male power and privilege and abuse women within the rape culture they have created to benefit themselves in this situation and all situations where men are sexually exploitative and girls and women are sexually exploited by men. this was not 2 years ago, this was THIS WEEK.

if i and others hadnt saved screenshots, this wouldnt have been much of a story would it? think about it.

“he erased the evidence and covered-up his backslapping identification with the rapist class when it was discovered and revealed, to put the onus on *us* to prove that he had done it, KNOWING that women have a credibility issue around this issue specifically.”

Yes, it’s really disgusting, and humiliating for feminists that he represents us. (LOL) It’s weeks like this I’m so glad I have the word “radical” in front of my feminism. I really hope young women are reading this.

i hope so too cherry. and BTW i have even *more* screenshots that i wasnt even sure would be relevant, for example where he deleted his formspring account: for the first few days it said “molester has disabled their account, we call it taking a nap” or something like that, basically admitting that there was once an account called “molester” and that it had been (temporarily?) disabled. NOW, when you click on the link, it gives you an error message, as if it was never there at all. we have screenshots of the way it was before, just 2 days ago. the trail of evidence that any of this happened is disappearing like a fart in the wind as they say. we have proof, but its no longer out in the world for everyone to see. someone would have to seek it out at this point, if they wanted to know the truth. and most people simply never bother.

Yes it is chilling. When you realize this is part of the historical pattern, you realize there *is* a history there, and that it *is* a pattern, and its most definitely NOT just individual men behaving badly, as everyone claims (when they are even willing to blame men at all).

It reveals in a concrete way thats easily processed what “male privilege” really is, and how male power operates, and demonstrates that even very young men without much social power at all are still absolutely soaking in male power, and aren’t hesitant at all to abuse that every chance they get.

It *is* fucking chilling. It’s stark and revealing and absolutely chills to the bone.

What these little bastards should’ve done of course (Matt mango tuscano took down his fb pics too BTW) is to LEAVE IT ALL UP, allow themselves to be judged by the community, and then they should’ve backed away from feminist organizing with women forever, knowing for certain that they were part of the problem and still are and always will be.

Are girls and women safer or less-steeped in rape culture now that the molester account is gone, and a couple of fb photos were taken down? Please. We are more in danger now than we ever were, because two men who demand access to women’s space and to “feminist organizing” have erased their own histories and what they have personally done and how they’ve abused their male power, and how they have sold AND CONTINUE TO sell women out to identify with the rapist class. We know what they did, but younger women won’t. And Matt and lester will be there, waiting for and relying on these young women’s ignorance. And *that* just chills me to the bone.

well i hesitate to speculate, but the slutwalk “movement” is sex-positive and built on the ideals of the male-centric “sexual revolution”, including pro-porn. the sex-pozzie movement is pro-porn, so as far as i can tell, this pic would not be antithetical to the politics behind slutwalk. they would have no reason *not* to post it there. that doesnt mean they did, but it wouldnt surprise me at all.

Haha. Ok yes that was a stupid question on my part. The issue of slutwalk being a white women’s movement has been there from the beginning. Hugo did a marvelous job of calling attention to his one WOC friend who helped him organize LA slutwalk, as if that did something to relieve either his own whiteness or his maleness (or that of LA slutwalk or any slutwalk).

I meant more along the lines of has anyone realized yet that you can’t reclaim this word and that men shouldn’t be involved? The issue of the n-word being used on a white woman’s sign kind of brings the whole thing home IMO. The entire concept of reclaiming the word “slut” is fubar. Thanks for the link.

pro-porn and sex-positivism themselves are completely dependent on western conveniences (like birth control) and white upper-class values (like virginity) making them racist and classist as well. ms. citrus writes about “sexual liberation” (meaning lots of PIV) only being liberating for those women whose virginity/chastity was prized in the first place: namely, rich white women. its a solid point, and i dont know why liberal feminists dont catch onto this, considering their alleged concern for intersectionality. most women around the world want to be free from PIV for obvious reasons, and even the luckiest of us are not free from it, so long as words like “prude” are still used to describe us when we choose to not have it.

Rachel Levy, a local activist and writer, took issue with the decision to march through The Block, a section of Baltimore St. home to many forms of legal and illegal sex work. “I thought it came across as ignorant at best, patronizing at worst, for a group of mostly-educated, mostly-white twenty-thirty-somethings to chant about re-claiming the word ‘slut’ to a street crowded with older, less privileged sex workers,” she blogged after the event, “Having worked with sex workers in Baltimore City, I can tell you that The Block is a hotbed of sexual exploitation. Judging from the looks on their faces, ‘yes means yes, no means no, yay sluts’ were NOT messages that resonated.”

which is also a very interesting point: yes means yes? really? even when theres money exchanged in the context of sexwork, where “yes” really means more like…something very different than YES? when this is true for many women across time and place who have PIV in coercive contexts and there is no other context? sheesh.

I am scared to write this – but I do not understand the radical feminist always thinking that piv is the worse way men can sexually violent to women. In my many experiences of indoors prostitution and porn – it was rare that the users did piv – and to be very honest, compare the many varieties of sexual torturing that their porn-fuelled brains were obsessed with, being fucked in the vagina was a relief. This was because it was usually quite short, relatively less painful and distracted them from other ways to torture me
The problem is not the penis – but the brain that decide to rape and torture women and girls.
I am being a bit sarcastic here -coz I really do believe that there no need for piv, for it a very pointless form of sex – and it fundamentally about conquering women and girls. But I was abused with fists, teeth, objects, mouths, kicked and smashed up. I was raped in the mouth, deep into the throat, drowning in water, in the anus, raped in every part of my body. So sorry, if in that time I was relieved if all punters/profiteers wanted from was piv.
I do know and understand it is very different for non-prostituted women – for some non-prostituted women and girls piv is a massive danger. It is terrible and horrific that so many women and girls have unwanted pregnancies, coz of the selfishness of piv, that women and girls are given male STDs coz of the selfishness of piv.
I just think all male sexual violence mostly pre-planned and comes from the brain – so cut the heads off, is a much better solution.

You see, FCM, that’s what I was talking about when I said that the PIV focus is important, but it is also important to talk about the other horrible things too, especially when we live in a pornified culture.

I understand the urgent need to get rid of the whole ‘PIV-as-sex’ pardigm (we have to get rid of that); but please also consider the other awful, gut-wrenching things that womyn like Rebecca are talking about.

Rebecca- Thank you for your courageous statement, by the way. You don’t have to be scared when you’re with us.

as far as i am aware, “radical feminists” do not, in fact, think that PIV is worse than the sexual abuse, torture and murder of women, including prostituted women. indeed, i understand that radical feminists have mostly shyed away from PIV analysis since seeing what dworkin was subjected to after writing “intercourse” and have actually preferred to focus on the sexual use and abuse of girls and women within the pornstitution industry, including sex trafficking. PIV as an institution has been addressed as part of the sexual politic and compulsory heterosexuality, but has not been front and center and never has been. lets not exaggerate the attention thats been paid to it, nor *my* influence on radical feminism as a whole. i am only one person, and i have limited time and energy, and i am particularly drawn to PIV analysis. thats all. to me it is very basic and easily understandable, and doesnt require much research, and serves a necessary function within the existing movement, which is comprised of many voices, and many many women who already tirelessly address the issues you talk about. all i would do is put my foot in my mouth and do a mediocre job at best, if i were to try to address everything. you all are free to discuss whatever you want, and you already are, all over the feminist blogs and over decades of research, writing, experience and activism.

Yes, FCM, you do fab work. 🙂 And your PIV analysis is very much needed, btw. Sorry, I cannot be grateful enough, when we consider that most people out there, including many, many vulnerable womyn, have swallowed the lie of “PIV-as-compulsory-in-sex.”

I guess, what I was just trying to say is that talking about other things too (occasionally) would not weaken your analysis; it would only make it stronger, because the ‘PIV-as-sex’ paradigm and compulsory heterosexuality cause those things in the first place. Those awful things are direct consequences of the whole dominant ‘PIV-as-sex’ ideology, and I think it’s worth mentioning, that’s all.

But, if it is your choice not to go there in a certain way that could strengthen your analysis, we’ll just say it’s specific to FCM then. 🙂

rebecca, you are free to think that my work is shit (or that its fab) if you think thats true. and you dont have to apologize to me, thats absolutely not what i was getting at, at all. but *i* am not “radical feminists.” maggie has made this comment more than once, and i was mostly addressing her. i do not claim to address everything, i dont have time and i would do a poor job. like now.

in case anyone hasnt noticed, i mostly just stay in my own little corner and do my work. actually, i get blasted for that from time to time, now that i think about it. apparently i am expected to make frequent rounds around the blogs and leave well thought out responses to everyone too, to show my support or something. but thats not realistic. i am sorry if you had the wrong impression about radical feminists, or if you think that my focus is inadequate, or that my voice is too loud. i will think about that. thanks for reading.

But, if it is your choice not to go there in a certain way that could strengthen your analysis, we’ll just say it’s specific to FCM then.

maggie, i dont think that addressing dom/sub or pointing out the obvious (that sexualized torture and murder of women by men is bad) will strengthen my analysis. if you think there is a stronger analysis to be made, incorporating those, then go ahead and do it. i am not being glib. please, do it, i would like to read it.

holy shit. I’d never read Lolita, on principle. I just knew it had to be horrifying. but I guess I wasn’t expecting to be reminded of my own life. If I ever meet another Nabokov fan I’m going to have to pour hot coffee on them or something. I was a toddler and my abuser did the lap thing. I’ve repressed most of it, but that’s one thing I told my mom about when I was little and they were divorcing. It’s written down somewhere, I don’t remember much. But he said he was innocent. I’m sure he was a fan of Lolita. he was probably “innocent” in his own mind, in some twisted awful way. I would panic to the point of throwing up when he came to visit. I was 6. He wanted visitation rights and thank god he didn’t get them. I’m actually amazed. but we moved in with my mom’s second boyfriend, and I apparently started touching myself in front of him (I don’t remember anything except being terrified). there’s some document, I had some kind of psychiatric evaluation. “she came onto me,” he said. he didn’t abuse me. but he didn’t defend me. my mom left him, too. I was displaying classic behavior of sexually abused children and my abuser got away on the basis of “no evidence”. what bullshit. men protect each other and call little girls seducers. bullshit.

I’m sorry for sharing such horrifying and personal information but this infuriates me like nothing else. I have been Lolita. and Lolita was a victim of abuse, not some kind of seductive child. What a repulsive book. it’s so goddamn blatant and yet women read it and worship it too. This male dominated literary canon is exactly why I decided not to major in English. Sheila Jeffreys is amazing. I must read this book

and I hope this young twerp gets a good dose of karma. he probably thinks of himself as an uber ~*~*nice guy*~*~. such a joke

I can’t believe Lolita was made into a film, too. One I’ll never watch. I read some interview once, I think about the casting. how when the girl actress took out a piece of gum out of her mouth and stuck it on her leg or something, she was perfectly seductive. that dood should be arrested right now for being turned on by that. ugh. but it seems almost every man is a humbert.

No, I don’t think saying “sexualized torture and murder of women by men is bad” will strengthen your analysis. Many feminists (including some libfems) already know this. I meant saying (one day, in passing) that cruel practices that exist in pornified sex are all direct consequences of the whole dominant ‘PIV-as-sex’ ideology will strengthen your analysis and more newbie anti-pornstitution radfems (who don’t feel like going there) will connect with the whole PIV and heteronormativity as the cause of worse things.

It will also avoid misogynists saying, “Oh, right, I can stick it anywhere else into a woman then?” I’ve heard misogynistic men say things like that (as a so-called “solution” on how to reduce the overpopulation on earth) and it’s really not nice…

Once again, your focus is adequate, don’t worry. I love your work, but I also see it as a way of explaining the cause for worse things, does that make sense?

honestly maggie, when you say “strengthen my analysis” what do you even mean by that? a sound analysis isnt made “stronger” by adding other things. if its weak then thats one thing, but the way you are using “strengthen the analysis” it sounds suspiciously like “talk about absolutely everything at the same time” to me. i dont think thats necessary, or indeed even realistic for any of us. do you? again, if you have something in mind, write it down and share it with us. i would like to see what you have in mind.

and rmott62, I’m so sorry you had to experience that.. I hope that the men who did that to you die horrible, painful deaths.

I can’t believe that any woman can defend porn or prostitution. How can anyone look at pr0n and think women are enjoying it? How can anyone call prostitution *sex work*?

Not too long ago there was talk around here (Canada) of legalizing prostitution. As though it would somehow be good for women. such bullshit!!

so many women are abused.. I guess most must be willingly blind because the truth -that men have each other covered, that they get off on seeing women tortured or torturing us themselves- is just too horrifying to contemplate

I can’t believe they marched through a red light district. what a disgusting display of ignorance.

Okay, you still don’t get my point, I’m sorry to say. 🙂 Don’t add those other things if you don’t want to, that’s fine. Your focus is adequate, but I think it’s important to also identify the PIV paradigm as being the cause of the other pornified things. Do you know what I mean now?

maggie, you are telling me what i conclude now. i have not said that i believe that, and you have not asked me if i believe it. *causation* is a very specific argument and i am not comfortable stating that with conviction at this juncture. are you? if you believe it, then write about it.

But don’t you believe that the pornified acts are direct consequences of the whole hetero PIV paradigm? Well, I sure do. I might write about this someday. Overpopulation and forced pregnancy are direct consequences of the PIV paradigm, but so are other degrading things men do to womyn.

in other words, among other things, “causation” is a timing issue. if something came before a thing, it mightve caused the thing, but if it came after, if definitely could not have caused it. you seem to be saying that PIV-as-sex is the original dom/sub, and that all other dom/sub (including porn and pornification, sexualized torture and woman-murder) springs from the original. yes? well…there are a LOT of things going on there, and timing is but one of them. and i am not even sure we have the timing part in the bag. i mean, PIV for procreation existed long before PIV was considered “sex” or “sexual” or sexxxay, didnt it? so are you saying that there was no dom/sub at all in those years (millenia?) between when PIV was used as procreation and when it became recreation? that would take some serious research that i havent done, and that kind of information might not even be available or knowable. frankly it doesnt even seem likely, and i dont think this is what you are even saying. so what *are* you saying?

causation is complicated. for now, all i am prepared to say about PIV-as-sex is that it *causes* unwanted pregnancy and reproductive-related female suffering. i do not think that i could credibly say any more than that, at this point. if you think you can, and can back it up, then please do. i honestly, honestly would like to see what you come up with.

I think that when heterosexuality became compulsory (possibly after the overthrow of matriarchy, I dunno), heteronormativity became the original dom/sub, and consequences of compulsory heterosexuality are PIV-as-sex and other degrading things.

Also, think about Miska’s comment (which I agreed with) and maybe you’ll know what I meant:

all other sexual practices are basically measured against PIV. PIV sets the standard and even if two people don’t actually have PIV and do other things, these things are based on a kind of PIV template. (I know. terrible paraphrasing here – sorry FCM!) So I tend to agree with your last point. I think if PIV is dealt with, it will mitigate the ways men try and force other degrading sexual acts on women. Cause all roads lead back to piv, in a sense. And once women are in the position where we no longer have to supply piv, nor would we have to supply other degrading sex acts, cause piv is the root of it all.

Though actualy I do see why there is a need to address other porn derived sex acts specifically. Back when I was 14 there was no pressure to supply anal, but that’s not the case for girls today. Many of these porn acts can be very physically damaging, and young girls are being bullied into doing them. It almost feels like a feminist emergency to address the mainstreaming of pornsex.

I really don’t wanna start arguing with you, FCM. I like you, and I think you’re a very good radfem. 🙂 What I’m sayin’ is written black on white, so I give up the explaining…

instead of “explaining” here and getting frustrated, why not write about it in its own post, maggie? i think you are misunderstanding my function here, and you have nothing to prove to me or anyone. if you think you are onto something, write about it. you have been asking me to write this post, (or to casually drop it into discussions elsewhere) and i dont even necessarily agree with your premise. that doesnt even make sense. why would i do that? i think you have had an idea for a post, and that it would be interesting to me and to others if you wrote it. its not something i can write at this juncture because its not something that i necessarily believe. in fact, you are clearly still gathering your thoughts and are building on what i and others have said. its a fetus of a post at this point. go with it, its a process, as you know. but its not *my* fetus, its yours. and thats great! 🙂

I think it speaks volumes that SW NYC is spending so much energy – including hosting meetings – around the John Lennon song sign (and they should address that) but has NOTHING to say about the pornographic photo posted in their album. Not a single word to say about that. Because in the end, sex violence against women is at the bottom of the heap, especially if she “chose” it by becoming a ‘sex worker’ right? I didn’t think I could get any more disgusted with SWs than I am now.

SW NYC has finally taken the porno pic down. They say, “Hi everyone! There are only one two people who moderate this page actively. We JUST saw another offensive picture that should have been taken down immediately. But when we look at the wall, we don’t see these photos or tags or anything. We only see what we post and peoples’ comments on them. Where do you see the pictures, etc.? Do we have to search for them? I guess we should be actively checking the “notifications” thing on the side, but is there another way? We’re sorry we didn’t check notifications.”

stomp and holler ay? it is tempting to just be grateful they arent calling themselves SLUTS? i guess? and it *is* better than pout ‘n shuffle….or wiggle and giggle…but not by much. 😦 yeah i made those up.

im trying to imagine a way to do this that *wouldnt* just be completely idiotic. and i am having a hard time. obviously! can anyone else suggest how a non-slutwallk-slutwalk might be effective, starting with a good name? im serious.

Stomping and hollering are what children do during tantrums. And if you go to the tumblr page for the Northampton walk, what you see are pictures of trans “men” joyfully contributing to the gender binary. Nothing says “patriarchy” like a faux “man” (in cheesy mustache no less!) marching alongside a woman in her bra with “slut” stenciled on her belly. Yes, they sure are striking a blow for something, but it isn’t against anything structural that’s actually keeping them right in their tiny little boxes. And if that isn’t sad enough just as it is, the sadder thing is that Northampton used to be a deeply progressive feminist place where women regularly destroyed porn in convenience stores, worked in co-ops that enforced 50% working memberships for women, brought performers and speakers to the area to further radicalize women, made the entire area safe for dykes to be dykes, etc. Now it’s mainstream liberal bullshit. Losing Northampton is right up there with losing MichFest; incredibly sad.

i didnt know that about northhampton noan. that is incredibly sad. 😦 and yes, stomp and holler is the essence of a temper tantrum. did they not see this coming when they were thinking about it? ffs. they are infantilizing themselves in a sexualized context. really gross. this HAS to be deliberate, so they can get male support. doesnt it? at the very least this will be the result. keep those feminist rape-protests sexxxay, girls. thats what its all about.